An armed march on Washington? Let’s not. Update: Kokesh an anti-war smear merchant?

posted at 2:31 pm on May 4, 2013 by Jazz Shaw

Before we get started on this story, I would like to take a moment to point out that you’d be hard pressed to find any point where I’ve been anything but a staunch defender of the Second Amendment, as I would hope most regular readers know. I’ve taken flack for it from a lot of people this year, ranging from family members to folks in the media. But even approaching it from that sort of position, I’ve got to say that this is a really bad idea.

A march on Washington with loaded rifles

Libertarian activist and radio host Adam Kokesh is hoping to get 1,000 people to march on Washington on July 4 — armed with loaded rifles. The plan, launched with a Facebook group today, is to gather on the Virginia side of the Potomac, where gun laws are lax, and then march across the bridge with loaded rifles slung over their shoulders into the District, where openly carrying weapons is generally prohibited.

“This will be a non-violent event,” the Facebook group warns, “unless the government chooses to make it violent.” Already, over 200 people have said they’ll attend the march.

The plan is to march over the bridge, around the Capitol building, the Supreme Court and the White House, all with loaded rifles slung over their shoulders. Honestly, it’s difficult to imagine a worse idea, particularly in the midst of a heated debate with gun grabbers in the government. Kokesh describes this as an act of “civil disobedience” but it falls well short of that goal. If he wanted to promote an act of peacefully breaking the law to make a point, it would certainly be worthy of considering. For example, you could take a large number of people to block the entrance to the main office of the A.T.F and force the police to arrest and remove you. But this is something very different.

Showing up with a thousand (or even a few hundred) people openly carrying loaded weapons and marching toward the Capitol is not something that law enforcement is going to play around with, particularly when you announce it in advance. And they’re not going to allow the march to proceed “peacefully” either. Normally I’d write this off as a bad idea that wouldn’t gain widespread support, but the problem here is that it doesn’t need widespread support. It would really only take a few hundred really upset people to get it rolling. And even if most of them intend it to be peaceful, when the officials show up to arrest them, weapons drawn, you have the potential for disaster which Rick Moran foresees.

With the furor over gun rights and the government’s efforts at gun control, this march is likely to attract enough people to make it an extraordinarily dangerous event. Who knows what kooks will be marching? Most marchers will no doubt be level headed and sincere in their desire for a non-violent event. But it only takes one unbalanced person to cause a tragedy.

Sensible gun owners, along with the NRA, are making the point that the government needs to respect the rights of law abiding, responsible gun owners and spend their time chasing the actual criminals. There could be no better gift to hand to gun rights opponents than to have a bunch of people get arrested for breaking established (if really bad) gun laws or, worse, getting in a shootout with the cops. This is not the type of representation we need in this debate.

[Kokesh] marched in uniform in mock patrols for the anti-war movement, paraded around holding an upside-down American flag (see Jonn Lilyea for more), was arrested for defacing signs, and traveled to Germany to urge soldiers to abandon their posts and seek aid and comfort with his anti-war minions.

Kokesh, believe it or not, is now running as a Republican candidate for Congress in New Mexico. And, believe it or not, he is getting positive exposure on at least one Fox News show. He has the backing of Ron Paul, the Republican Liberty Caucus, and the 9/12 Project.

The New Mexico Republican Party has its head in the sand. If you have friends and family in New Mexico, make sure they know who the real Adam Kokesh is.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Comments

What is here, is at the discretion of the hosts, if this is your only source of breaking news or opinions, that’s your choice. To suggest that it is the entire commenters only source, is silly. But thanks for watching out for us.

but I see in the news where one of our school players in Utah killed a ref with a punch.

hawkdriver on May 5, 2013 at 2:00 PM

The player is 17 yo. Self-control is part of traditional character(integrity, honesty, candor, discipline, self-control, respect, loyalty) that used to be inculcated in our children. But the progressives had to do away with it to usher in their secular-humanistic hell on earth utopia. Now we see the dividends.

Britain has never had a “gun culture” like that of the United States, but there were about 200,000 legally-registered handguns in Britain before the ban, most owned by sports shooters. All small-bore pistols, including the .22 caliber, were included in the ban, along with rifles used by target shooters. Penalties for anyone found in possession of illegal firearms range from heavy fines to prison terms of up to 10 years.
More than 160,000 handguns have been surrendered by their owners who got compensation .So there wasn’t a big revolt and i am sure some were hidden
This was found recently,http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2266958/Builder-discovers-deadly-haul-30-shotguns-pistols-hidden-false-wall-days-Dunblane-massacre.html

Assuming the US were to legislate, reduce the volume of legally held guns, and vigorously enforce gun and ammunition control laws as is done in the UK, and given twenty years for the results to exhibit themselves:

Do you think the US could achieve results similar to the UK’s commendable “firearms are used in <1% of all recorded crime" status?

UK’s commendable “firearms are used in <1% of all recorded crime" status?

Are you Dr Phil? What do you think?
I don’t believe it’s a huge stretch to say fewer guns ,fewer gun crime/killings.
But it’s deeper and cultural issue i think in the U.S then here, so for me just to say yes makes it seem a really easy question and you are all stupid for not knowing the obvious right answer.

But for us to reach low gun crime we didn’t have to go through a civil war
I think to try to follow us would destroy your nation from within and probably kill more American’s,you’ve got the gun’s.

But do you think we as a civilized nation (and world leader) could reach a similar “firearms are used in <1% of all recorded crime" rate if we enacted similar legislation and programs?

Not necessarily under 1% like the UK, but still low?

I don’t think it would be possible to reduce the percentage of gun crimes with a ban and confiscation.

With the huge amount of guns owned here in the US, the only people (yet again) that would follow the rule of law are law abiding citizens. Considering the fact that this group of individuals are not responsible for the large amount of gun crime (many shootings are criminals shooting other criminals) we can only assume that a good percentage of gun crimes would continue to happen.

I doubt we could provide the necessary enforcement to prevent them either. We already have a wealth of anti-gun laws on the books in cities like Washington D.C., Chicago, L.A and New York City yet people continue to be murdered in the dozens every week from gun violence.

Then of course you would condemn the 200,000 to 1 million people every year that use firearms to successfully defend themselves and their loved ones. Many of these instances (last I saw it was around 5%) resulted in shots being fired. So we would conservatively estimate at least 8 in 10 legal uses of firearms don’t even result in a shooting.

The situation wouldn’t matter in general because the violent crime would just shift from guns to stabbing weapons or blunt objects. Sure, gangs might not kill each other as easily but instead of drive-by shootings you’d have them tossing pipe bombs into homes.

If people want to hurt each other, they will find a way. The question is how much are we going to prevent the rest of us from being able to protect ourselves?

JFKY, my point in posting has nothing to do with this march. It is concerning that hot air “breaks” a story that broke a month and a half ago and they missed most of the story when they reported what was on their limited radar. Live and learn, or don’t.

Ed Graef on May 5, 2013 at 1:57 PM

*WOW* so our complaint is that HotGas didn’t jump on this story sooner…sorry for you about that.

Also, don’t send everyone via one type of transportation. Even the dumbest fed screen-watcher will notice a couple dozen vans all converging on DC. Flying in by civilian air is right out, subway and bus maybe. And if there’s any viable water transportation (I honestly don’t know) consider that too.

MelonCollie on May 5, 2013 at 12:30 PM

Humvees. That’s only really manly way to make a point that doesn’t need to be made.

But do you think we as a civilized nation (and world leader) could reach a similar “firearms are used in <1% of all recorded crime" rate if we enacted similar legislation and programs?

Not necessarily under 1% like the UK, but still low?

rogerb on May 5, 2013 at 2:53 PM

I haven’t said i know all the answers and that we have cracked it.
There is some truth in the saying,’guns don’t kill people,people kill people’
It has got to be for the people to decide that a civilized nation is one with strict gun control not just the government enforcing it.

1) Thanks for sticking around and trying to support your position. The vast majority of progressives would’ve fled the thread a long time ago. You’re the only one in recent memory I can recall sticking around to actually debate a topic, frankly.

2) It’s always neat to see the exact moment a debate is lost.

Ready?

Just to reiterate the last few pages, the firearm-related crime rate in the UK under, per you, strict gun control:

Firearm offences continue to make up a small proportion of overall recorded crime. In 2010/11, firearms were used in 0.3 per cent of all police recorded offences,

mags on May 5, 2013 at 4:05 AM

And your position on the violence and worse-than-lax gun control of the US:

The FBI estimates that there are over 200 million privately-owned firearms in the US. If you add those owned by the military, law enforcement agencies and museums, there is probably about 1 gun per person in the country.
What definition of ‘control’ are you using. It’s like me saying i am on birth control but i have 20 kids.

mags on May 5, 2013 at 12:43 PM

So because of strict gun control with (paraphrased for space but quoting you directly) handgun bans, “confiscation schemes”, regulation of rifles and shotguns, strict checks including storage and separate ammo, and a greatly reduced volume of guns per this post, the UK has a crime-related firearm use rate of less than 1%.

Let’s write that again and bold it to single it out.

Per you and your citations, with strict gun control the UK has a crime-related firearm use rate of less than 1%.

In no small part because

All small-bore pistols, including the .22 caliber, were included in the ban, along with rifles used by target shooters. Penalties for anyone found in possession of illegal firearms range from heavy fines to prison terms of up to 10 years.

mags on May 5, 2013 at 2:14 PM

Impressive and commendable. Sorry about this next bit.

In 2011, an estimated 1,203,564 violent crimes occurred nationwide, a decrease of 3.8 percent from the 2010 estimate.

In 2011, there were an estimated 9,063,173 property crime offenses in the nation.

The FBI estimates that there are over 200 million privately-owned firearms in the US. If you add those owned by the military, law enforcement agencies and museums, there is probably about 1 gun per person in the country.

Deluded reasoning.I told you i didn’t care or wanted to discuss U.S gun laws.If you think that was some sort of win then continue in your smugness.
All you have done is disappointed someone who thought an American was interested in someone else’s view’s.

The highest crime of gun violence is being killed.Due to your extremely high level of gun killings you have more of a chance of being dead before the next gun thread.
There will probably been more school and mass killings and suicides.
Even in the last few days numerous children have killed their siblings with there own guns.
This is what you should be discussing and don’t reference,if you really think you have achieved anything or made any point it is a very sad reflection of your nation. All i can give is sadness and pity that this is what happened to a great nation who i thought had good people.

Even in the last few days numerous children have killed their siblings with there own guns.

This is what you should be discussing and don’t reference,if you really think you have achieved anything or made any point it is a very sad reflection of your nation.

mags on May 6, 2013 at 7:42 AM

Wait, we were supposed to discuss individual cases?

But mags, you introduced the topic:

Violent crime is difficult to compare,but murder,gun killings and gun crime are easier

mags on May 4, 2013 at 7:25 PM

FWIW, though I, and the mags of May 4, agree on your “sad reflection” bit but in reverse if, now that you have additional data, you don’t add the new knowledge to your future gun control posts and positions.

You can’t say stat’s are good as long they have the results you want,but crap if they don’t

mags on May 4, 2013 at 4:52 PM

Willful ignorance and disregarding the data you’ve been shown establishes gun control as a faith-based argument no different than posting “I oppose them because God told me guns are bad.”

The second amendment should be construed to allow anyone to carry an armed weapon in public. Combining that right with the first amendment right to assemble peaceably should not be a problem.

But my guess is there’s a process to follow for such a parade in DC. They probably need to apply for a permit.

So why not apply for the permit, describe the armed march in the permit application and when it’s turned down, you suddenly have standing to sue, demanding that the permit be issued? I can’t imagine it would be hard to find funding for the suit.

Willful ignorance and disregarding the data you’ve been shown establishes gun control as a faith-based argument no different than posting “I oppose them because God told me guns are bad.”

rogerb on May 6, 2013 at 8:05 AM

At no point was i telling you what you should think or what the U.S should do.I thought arrogance was just a stero-type of an American.
If you think a discussion especially from different nations has to be a battle ,to manipulate a genuine good natured (i thought) exchange to this level,then i can see why you need your guns and keep shooting eachother.

I never said i oppose guns in the U.S.But you are telling me that the U.K are wrong ? Interesting

O.K ,what is your definition of gun crime in the U.S Is it the same as the U.K.
A gun offence here covers,
Firearms are taken to be involved in an offence if they are fired, used as a blunt instrument
against a person, or used as a threat. Firearms covered by the Firearms Act 1968 include handguns, shotguns, rifles,
imitation weapons, air weapons and some other weapon types such as CS gas and pepper sprays.

If that data was deemed an offence in the U.S would you still have a 0.9% rate?

you should of done that before claiming ‘gotcha’.
Somone told me once,

You can’t say stat’s are good as long they have the results you want,but crap if they don’

t

argument still gets the US at at just barely over 3% of the total crimes.

And in the U.K it is 0.3%,and you have spent all day saying it was less then 1 %

From your own stats,

According to the National Crime Victimization Survey, 467,321 persons were victims of a crime committed with a firearm in 2011. In the same year, data collected by the FBI show that firearms were used in 68 percent of murders, 41 percent of robbery offenses and 21 percent of aggravated assaults nationwide

Here are your FBI Stat’s,note they don’t record weapon data for forcible rape.
You are going have to add 19,766 suicides by firearm because that’s a crime.
You haven’t included the 55,544 non gun injuries during an assault .
Which is different to 138,336 gun aggravated assault .
You will add on unintentional gun deaths and accident which seems to be 600-800.

From FBI stat’s
In 2011, there were an estimated 354,396 robberies nationwide.
Among the robberies for which the UCR Program received weapon information in 2011, strong-arm tactics were used in 42.3 percent, firearms were used in 41.3 percent, and knives and cutting instruments were used in 7.8 percent of robberie

.
“I don’t believe it’s a huge stretch to say” … more guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens would reduce ALL TYPES of crime, including criminal use of guns.
.
Law abiding citizens became . L A Z Y . after the great WWII, and en masse they gave up the responsibility and DUTY ….. to maintain possession of, and knowledge and experience with FIREARMS.

The fact that Americans in post-WWII America decided that crime would never be that great of a problem, or that citizens no longer needed to be this “sword of Damocles” over the head of a potentially tyrannical government is inexcusable.

It’s our DUTY to keep government in fear of the people. It’s not just a right.

John Lott’s landmark study came to the same conclusion with multiple study groups: More legally owned guns = less crime. It seems counterintuitive, but think about it. If you’re a criminal in a city that you know it’s illegal to carry a gun in, you can run wild in mayhem and not have to realistically fear any repercussions outside of arrest by professional cops, who are a small percentage of the total populace. On the other hand, if you are in a jurisdiction where you’re not sure who’s packing heat, you’ll be a lot less likely to do your fellow man harm when you’re not sure if you’re going to end up with a bullet of your own lodged somehwere in a vital organ. It’s really not that difficult a conclusion to arrive at.

rogerb on May 7, 2013 at 7:27 AM
Great job. Well done. Loved the “accidents as crime” and “55,544 non gun injuries”, btw. Non-gun injuries as gun crime. Ha. That was probably my favorite.

Can you just shoot eachother over there? What about if it’s a careless accident or even a negligent accident.
A accident could be involuntary manslaughter.Are you really saying no accidental incident’s are a crime?

Non-gun injures as gun crime

So if an armed robber robs a bank but doesn’t kill anybody then that is not a gun crime?
This is our definition of gun crime,

Firearms are taken to be involved in an offence if they are fired, used as a blunt instrument
against a person, or used as a threat.
Firearms covered by the Firearms Act 1968 include handguns, shotguns, rifles,
imitation weapons, air weapons and some other weapon types such as CS gas and pepper sprays.

3.5%
Do you really believe if it is 3.5% I would think that was low.It’s a thousand percentage higher then here.

Only in America would that be deemed’ low’ You kept telling me less then 1% is low. Also saying ,did i think the U.S could follow the U.K to reach the same percentage of 0.3
What do you think of 0.3% here? What do you put it down too?

I will give you my mixed up comment,i only have 7 fingers and i have a child strapped to my back.
You must of recognised it was wrong to comment on it.

3.5%
Do you really believe if it is 3.5% I would think that was low.It’s a thousand percentage higher then here.

It’s math from your numbers. Do you want to try them again?

BTW, here in the US we would say “ten times higher”. We may also note that you established the US has one gun for every man, woman, and child.

Using your numbers the US firearm-crime rate is only ten times higher than the UK with, per you, an infinitely higher exposure to guns.

Good point. Thanks.

Only in America would that be deemed’ low’ You kept telling me less then 1% is low. Also saying ,did i think the U.S could follow the U.K to reach the same percentage of 0.3
What do you think of 0.3% here? What do you put it down too?

Except you typed the accusatory

How can you say firearms are only used in 3% of all overall crime in the U.S?

mags on May 6, 2013 at 8:32 PM

Implying 3% is low.

I will give you my mixed up comment,i only have 7 fingers and i have a child strapped to my back.
You must of recognised it was wrong to comment on it.

mags on May 7, 2013 at 12:52 PM

What are you talking about? The reversed US/UK? It was comical, that’s all. I don’t use typos as gotchas. We all make mistakes.

You mocked me for including gun accidents in gun crime. You can still accidentlly shoot somebody but face criminal charges .Is that not the case,do you just say,well it was an accident?
If that’s the case can i come over there with my husband?

Using your numbers the US firearm-crime rate is only ten times higher than the UK with, per you, an infinitely higher exposure to guns.

Good point. Thanks.

If you believe a higher exposure to guns reduces firearm crime rate
why is it ten times higher?
Is there any percentage that would make you rethink beliefs?

I think we classed horn on a small issue,i do appreciate and like discussing different views with people in other countries

Hate to break it to you but being anti-war is not a bad thing. Well not if you’re a God fearing Christian. How many times has Malkin grabbed a rifle and led a patrol in Iraq or Afghanistan? Maybe she’s planning on doing it when we invade Syria, Iran, North Korea or any other of the countries we need to make “safe for Democracy” that she keeps beating the war drums for….

If 0.3% women in the U.K died from breast cancer
but 3.5% in the U.S . Who decides that ten times more in the U.S still counts as low?
Even though there is such a disparity it can be seen as low,Rog has decided.
The whole point you have been trying to make is that the more guns a country has the less violent crime/gun crime/gun killings.
It was you who said less that 1% was low.

I won’t even bother researching the details of my 8% link,

I know i am going on about , but i can’t see how you reached 3.5%

Have you just added all crime together (including the numbers i gave you) and then decided that 8% of these are gun related?

The 8% i think you are still using ,related to guns used in overall violent crime that were used but non fatal.
Part of improving that statistic they site is decreasing is because of improved medical response and action’s
That is only one category ,the FBI separates it.

So 67% are used in murder.41.4 percent of reported robberies.
Please,so we can move on,how are you dividing the number of overall crimes with that of firearms?
I think you might be afraid to,if you are confident then just do it

Except it’s probably best not to try and go on the attack when you don’t understand something.

Confidence? Yes, actually, since you bring it up, I was confident you had the math skills of a 12 year old.

Go to your posts.

mags on May 6, 2013 at 8:18 PM
mags on May 6, 2013 at 7:10 PM

Multiply to find the number of robbery related firearm crimes.

Add that number to your other numbers. I used 800 for accidents to bolster your argument as much as possible, btw.

I won’t even bother researching the details of my 8% link, but I will freely add the CDC’s firearm-related homicides to the 96285 in order to boost your position:

rogerb on May 6, 2013 at 4:28 PM

I wasn’t going to mention it the first time you quoted it as a GOTCHA!!!, but you’ve brought it up twice now as an attack and it makes a lot more sense now. You didn’t understand that I was giving you the highest numbers possible.

Read the bolded again that you keep leaving out when you quoted what you thought was a GOTCHA!!!. I was helping your position.

Your faith-based approach to the issue makes more sense now, too. The numbers are confusing, so you rely on your feelings and what people you admire tell you.

If 0.3% women in the U.K died from breast cancer
but 3.5% in the U.S . Who decides that ten times more in the U.S still counts as low?

You do. Constantly. By dodging the posts on grades and weight (nicely done, thanks), and with your own actions every day.

Here, I’ll prove to you why you believe 3.5% is low.

Ready?

If a magazine offered you 100,000 pounds to write one article detailing what you’ve learned as a mother, would you refuse if they phoned the next day and apologized because they could only pay 96,500?

How can you say firearms are only used in 3% of all overall crime in the U.S?

mags on May 6, 2013 at 8:32 PM

Implying 3% is low.

No,you are saying firearms are ‘only used’ is 3.5% like you are proud and awaiting for an award.
You seem proud that even if it is 10 times(did you see what i did there i appreciated your conversion to stone)more you accept that level.

That seems like an odd request since they don’t close these threads. Not to mention I’m confident enough to show the debate publicly, and happy it will appear in google searches for people unaware of the small difference between the full-ban UK and the 1-gun-per-person US.

Thanks again for your help with that. BTW, we’re still waiting on your response to

If a magazine offered you 100,000 pounds to write one article detailing what you’ve learned as a mother, would you refuse if they phoned the next day and apologized because they could only pay 96,500?

However since we have been doing this for so long your gun crime,gun murders and non fatal gun crime has dropped substantially in the last 10years according to Pew Research , still high to us but reassuring for American’s that something has worked.

To be honest i am numbers and stat’s weary.We will have to agree to disagree.It was never my intention to get into the minutiae of American’s and guns.
If you remember i kept explaining that i support your 2nd amendment and it’s up to you what you do with gun control.
I just joined in when as usual the U.K was mis represented.

It irrelevant to me what the numbers are in the U.S especially now when you have no interest in giving an opinion on gun’s in the U.K ,that was part of the issue i really wanted to get your perspective on
So i will leave it at that

Not yet, please. Is that 28% closer to the number you suspected for the US?

I don’t really want to comment if you are setting me up like last time

I felt that you asked me leading question’s so you could say i was uninformed.
It was like talking to two different people,one who seemed interested and one who wanted to be overly challenging.

So not wanting to discuss this issue , but wanting to win an argument.

So, if you think 28% is a load of crap just tell me, I keep saying that this is up to the American people to decide these issue’s.

I have looked at the Pew Research data that show Americans perception of gun crime is higher then it really is.

I also know that people say the highest gun crime in the U.S is carried out on those place with stricter gun control.
Didn’t know that weapons used in rape is not recorded.Didn’t know getting stat’s in the U.S is so hard partly because of different laws in different states

However, if you think my view on this has such significance to you , i’ll say…
I never really had a number in my head. I knew the U.S has a high level of gun killings./gun murders ,gun’s used by criminals, that the number of gun suicide is higher then murder,more school shootings/mass murders and way too many kids killing kids.

The point i have been trying to say is,compare the gun violence between state’s in the U.S and argue the less guns/more crime debate.
But you can’t argue the same when comparing the U.S to Countries that show less guns/less crime

It was like talking to two different people,one who seemed interested and one who wanted to be overly challenging. So not wanting to discuss this issue , but wanting to win an argument.

Ah yes, unlike the capital-lettered

ROG,…
% gun crime 28.02%

Aren’t we discussing this to get to the root of the issue?

Your position remains that you know, just know, guns are bad, and you’ve been told the US rate is tremendously high.

You admitted it on page 5:

at the time of the killings, struck a nerve with us who were beginning to worry about the country’s gun culture

And again today:

I never really had a number in my head. I knew the U.S has a high level of gun killings./gun murders ,gun’s used by criminals, that the number of gun suicide is higher then murder,more school shootings/mass murders and way too many kids killing kids.

You’re operating on faith. Again, it’s a religious thing. I’m not saying that as a personal attack against you, though, and I’m not really posting these for you specifically. The entire anti-gun side operates at that level. Your mind is made up. It’s the equivalent to “God told me guns are bad”. I’m posting numbers to try to get through to people who don’t “believe” like you.

That’s part of why I’m glad the thread will continue to be visible in google searches.

I felt that you asked me leading question’s so you could say i was uninformed.

Goodness, why would anyone think that?

But don’t think it was me who set you up. You were so convinced in your faith-based 28% that you stopped before you were finished.

You’d reached a number that you resonated with your beliefs.

You left out a step because you wanted it to be 28%. It made sense to your heart and what you felt was right.

Guns 313892
TOTAL 1,120138

mags on May 8, 2013 at 6:53 PM

Ready?

28% = 313892
Total violent crimes 1120138

Know what’s left?

Firearm offences continue to make up a small proportion of overall recorded crime. In 2010/11, firearms were used in 0.3 per cent of all police recorded offences,

How can you say firearms are only used in 3% of all overall crime in the U.S?

mags on May 6, 2013 at 8:32 PM

Ha. How did you put it? Oh yeah:

rogerb

Hilarious

mags on May 6, 2013 at 10:59 PM

What is this now, the third, maybe fourth time you’ve lost the identical argument in the same thread? I’ve definitely never seen that happen before.

What do you think of 0.3% here? What do you put it down too?

My question was well hidden.

Sorry I missed it. I remember reading it and thinking you’d left out a comma after “what” and “down” and it was an insult (“too” instead of “two” led me to think that) .

What do you think of 0.3% here? What do you put it down too?

Ethics, probably. We’ve got a 1:1 guns-to-people ratio and only a 3% overall crime rate. You have

All small-bore pistols, including the .22 caliber, were included in the ban, along with rifles used by target shooters. Penalties for anyone found in possession of illegal firearms range from heavy fines to prison terms of up to 10 years.

mags on May 5, 2013 at 2:14 PM

And you still have 0.3%.

Not much else it could be.

Ha, just kidding. Mostly.

Seriously? It’s because criminals don’t obey laws.

Say, you never answered this, btw:

If a magazine offered you 100,000 pounds to write one article detailing what you’ve learned as a mother, would you refuse if they phoned the next day and apologized because they could only pay 96,500?

Again ,under property crime the offence of stealing weapons is classed as gun crime,this is were your criminals are getting the weapons
On average, firearms were stolen in
an annual average of about 4% of
the 2.4 million burglaries occurring
each year, in 2% of the 529,200
robberies, and in less than 1% of the
13.6 million other crimes involving
theft from 2005 through 2010
. Burglaries accounted for
58% of the 153,900 victimizations
each year in which a gun was stolen,
and robberies accounted for about
7% of the victimizations involving
a gun theft.
About 0.4% of thefts
involved the theft of a gun, yet thefts
accounted for about a third (33%)
of the victimizations in which a gun
was stolen.Overall, about 93% of
gun thefts occurred during property
crimes.

at the time of the killings, struck a nerve with us who were beginning to worry about the country’s gun culture

Yes i said following Dunblane in 1996 gun crime was going up in the U.K

This might be easier if you could just tell me what handful of crimes guns are not involved with in the U.S.
I did just the narrow ‘violent crime’,of which you don’t record weapons used in rape.
But thanks for including property crime ,you are right we had to include all crime.
This show to true America and it’s addiction to violence and guns

What is this now, the third, maybe fourth time you’ve lost the identical argument in the same thread? I’ve definitely never seen that happen before.

These stat’s are your details of your own country that you live in.
I would expect you to have a better grip and insight.
Why don’t you,is it because God told you ‘guns are good’?
American’s must have their own God,carrying 2 handguns ,3 assault rifles and ammo around his neck.
I don’t what God you are going on about or your faith to believe that God would admire the guns that slaughtered 20 children in school.

You have had a nearly a week of scrambling trying to make your claim of more guns/less gun crime.
Over and Over you have failed to have any knowledge of the country you live in and seem oblivious too.
I have given you plenty of opportunities to make your point.
Unfortunately you have failed miserably,i am sorry if you feel embarrassed but i did give you the opportunity to save face earlier today which you squandered .
I wish you well but i have things to do.

Yikes. I can certainly see why you wanted to hide the discussion earlier.

I have given you plenty of opportunities to make your point.

mags on May 9, 2013 at 8:44 PM

And you have my sincerest thanks. I couldn’t have proved it so well or so often without your help. I could hardly believe you stuck around this long. What was this last time? Four times your worldview was shaken because of 7th grade math?

Five?

And you want to storm away angrily without understanding why your 96% is comically and completely off? Yeah, way to demonstrate that you’re interested in being informed on the issue. Thanks for that.

Not to mention not answering any of the questions about grades, weight, or the 100,000 pound magazine article. You really don’t realize that not answering also verifies each of them?

I’m sorry the low numbers of the US are difficult to take in, and I’m sorry they’re making you angry. Like I said, it’s borderline religious. You’re defensive because nothing but your faith matters. Thanks for showing it to the readers.

Seriously though, thanks for all of it. I couldn’t have done it without your willing assistance. Your 3% will be the most helpful, but the entire thread will be useful in the future.

You are correct 3% of crimes in the U.S is carried out without guns
Your violent crimes and non violent. You don’t know how funny you sound, please for your own sake,don’t go down this route because you will be a laughing stock to those who read,the same as you are here because have forwarded Roger’s theory on guns on my facebook and i’m getting some funny comments on you and your sums,ignorance and Yank DNA in general

You are correct 3% of crimes in the U.S is carried out without guns… the same as you are here because have forwarded Roger’s theory on guns on my facebook and i’m getting some funny comments on you and your sums,ignorance and Yank DNA in general

mags on May 10, 2013 at 6:44 AM

If you’re confident in your math, link to this thread.

Let your friends read and laugh at the data themselves.

You won’t, though. Because you know you’re wrong. It’s the same reason you’re lashing out angrily. This is why I joke about it being religious.

I know you’re angry that you’re being forced to question your faith, but please re-examine this:

On average, firearms were stolen in
an annual average of about 4% of
the 2.4 million burglaries occurring
each year, in 2% of the 529,200
robberies, and in less than 1% of the
13.6 million other crimes involving
theft from 2005 through 2010

I guess we really are done. Calling names, storming away, and then badmouthing someone to friends seems a pitiful way for an adult to end an fact-based conversation. It’s a shame.

Hey, look at that. I’m still here.

And I would love to hear what you imagined the 93% meant.

Sorry in advance in case your friends google my name and the topic and actually read the thread. Well, read the thread and can do the math, especially since I used your numbers each time. All the badmouthing in the world can’t improve someone else’s math and reading skills:

I felt that you asked me leading question’s so you could say i was uninformed.

mags on May 9, 2013 at 3:10 PM

I never had any real need to say you were uninformed. All I had to do was wait for your posts.

BTW, posts like that show that you knew in your heart your position was wrong.

I don’t really want to comment if you are setting me up like last time

mags on May 9, 2013 at 3:10 PM

It was never me setting you up. You did it to yourself each time. And again, a fact-based position can’t be “set up”. Numbers can’t be “set up” Only feelings can be.

Regardless, thanks again for your help and tell your facebook friends hi and to search for me on hotair like this:

“rogerb”

The quotation marks are the key. Otherwise google tries to separate the “b” from the whole.

I do hope you’ll post the link on your page, though. Here’s one you can copy and paste:

It goes directly to one of your posts. Not a bad one, either, but the one you believed proved your position. It would be much easier for them to find that way, and you have the added benefit of directly showing them how much and how easily you trounced me.

I’m confident they’d enjoy reading the thread, and it would likely be useful for their overall understanding of the topic as well.